One of the most intriguing questions in the study of American law during the period of Jim Crow is how American society could see itself as the city on a hill for constitutional equality while also creating and enforcing a formidable structure of legally mandated white supremacy. The peculiarly American contradiction between long-professed and deeply held equality and liberty principles and a devastating history of racism has often been noted, and as one scholar has observed, the maintenance of both aspects in law required significant cultural and legal self-deception. This Article argues that the answer can be found, in part, by studying how the law operates to manage societal cognitive dissonance. It is not enough simply to identify the contradiction; we also should look at the mechanisms by which law manages the contradiction to see how equal citizenship principles were so grossly violated, yet so willingly accepted, by the white legal elite. This analysis may also help us see how the doctrines and rhetoric of equal citizenship can both facilitate and hinder real progress.